Posts by quietbadger352

stormytiger10 said:DELETED just look at all the people living on this planet today...😵

seriously, do some actual homework before you start typing about a topic...

The Depression happened right here in the US and lasted for ages... back then, America wasn't suffering from hyperinflation, it was the exact opposite—deflation...

And honestly? The Federal Reserve was one of the biggest culprits for turning a recession into a full-blown depression. They were acting like an inexperienced bank, totally out of their depth and facing stuff they'd never dealt with before...

Instead of cutting interest rates, they started pushing restrictive monetary policy...

Get your facts straight before you start posting nonsense about things you don't understand...

Germany hit a recession a year before their market crashed, but in the US, the stock market crash happened three months after we already slid into a recession...

That market crash wasn't even that weird, considering the average P/E ratio was over 60 if I recall correctly... nowadays it's around 20... honestly, a market crash will happen in Shanghai or some small town before it hits the NYSE or LSE

So what, we’re supposed to make the same mistakes as '29? It's completely stupid to compare those two eras—they aren't even remotely comparable... an idiot learns from his own mistakes, so what do you call someone who doesn't even learn from his own blunders and raises interest rates instead of cutting them?😵

Obviously, the US doesn't want a repeat of what happened to Japan, and since that's hitting them now, they're dealing with inflation that's under control, which is way less of a headache than a total economic slowdown...

I see some of you clearly have no clue that the economy works in cycles. Growth leads to a decline, then a decline leads back to growth. That’s how it’s always been, and that's how it'll always be...

Comparing 1929 to the global economy today is just plain stupid and pointless for a million different reasons...

Think for a second and maybe Google it before you start copy-pasting...

Exactly! 👍

Mark Sullivan62 said:Look, I don't know, I don't think I ever actually said I believed it was impossible,

if you’ve been following my rants in the chat, I’m mostly staying far away from those funds that hit you with upfront fees, and especially the ones where the returns are pegged to the Euro.

The reality is, I’ve got five different funds in my portfolio right now, and honestly, the pool of future funds I'd actually consider putting money into is getting smaller by the day; so if I want to keep diversifying down the road, I’ll eventually be forced to pick one with an entry fee or one tied to the Euro...

See? Even you’re getting "misled" by this website!
KDP in America manages all their funds in US Dollars, which is how they handle contributions too. The fact that they publish comparison data in Federal Reserve dollars is really just for info purposes.

Why would a site like this publish everything in Federal Reserve dollars? They must be the only ones who 👎

What a mess... 😕

Mark Sullivan62 said:If you look at it through a rough lens, it seems like things really started picking up right after Canada joined the European Union.

So, basically, there’s zero reason to sweat the returns once we're officially in the European Union.

Not quite! It actually looked a bit rough during that last year before joining...

Anyway, averages are averages, and that 15-year average isn't exactly small!

And honestly, what’s happening post-EU entry is tripping me up a little too. I was totally expecting yields to tank way more drastically—maybe an 8 to 12% drop annually...

- but instead, it's just kind of... off:
Why do you think Victoria can't just follow that same path?
Or take unnamed in New York City, for example—what year are we looking at for them?😁 👍

Jamie Newman5 said:18 years at 10%?!?

Fine. I'll pull all my cash out of Mexico and Mexico right now and hand it to whoever can guarantee me 10% for the next 18 years! Actually, let's go further... I'll sell the house, the vacation home, everything I own, dump it all into your "guaranteed" 10%, and then just buy everything back on a mortgage at 4.99%. If inflation stays around 3%, I'm looking at a clean 2% profit. Brilliant!

P.S. DM me the name of this fund that pays 10% for 18 years. Thanks.

P.S. The effective rate on housing savings is closer to ten percent. There's no risk (funds are backed by State Farm), the subsidies aren't going to keep dropping forever, and there's a path toward getting favorable loans, which might be worth something to kids one day...

Funds are a decent way to invest, obviously, but unlike housing savings—which is pretty passive and doesn't swing wildly every month—funds are active. They force you to constantly check the ticker, which leads to anxiety when things dip and fake euphoria when they spike.

I'm still sticking by housing savings.

I actually know a fund that hit a whopping 2,850.00% net return in just 15 years and 4 months!

If that isn't a 19.00% CAGR... I don't know what is.

In total, that's about 7,800.00%, or a massive 33.83% CAGR. 😁

Here, check out this link and tell me if you're still surprised...

INSTRUCTIONS:
- For the "fund" option, pick unnamed
- Set the start date to: 01/01/1992
- Set the end date to: 05/30/2007
And then just hit show!

Go ahead and keep giving whatever advice you want...

Morgan Jones14 said:Fair enough, maybe I’m just being sensitive and that smiley at the end threw me off...
I decided to stick to basic savings accounts for the kids. Between our family funds and getting into stocks lately, we've got plenty of exposure already.
Am I bitter? Yeah, mostly at myself😬 for all those missed opportunities over the last few years.
So you say you're a pro advisor
I might actually need some pointers soon. I've only recently started taking investing seriously, and there's no way I'll have the time to track everything down the road. I won't think twice about paying for some solid advice.

- That's how I read the situation too, which is why I jumped in—just wanted to remind you that in this game, time isn't exactly on your side.
- You'll get the best advice from an unbiased consultant who earns their living through small fees attached to specific financial products offered by institutions.
- Of course, "unbiased" doesn't mean someone working for one specific bank, one State Farm, or one fund manager (not even if they represent one from each category).

Banks and insurance companies aren't the only ones holding all the cards when it comes to public info about how they operate anymore...🙂

Morgan Jones14 said:guess I'm just dumb and you're a genius🙏
oh great, thanks for "enlightening" us, oh wise one, telling us exactly where to dump our tiny little $50 monthly
paycheck. just throw it all into Vanguard funds, right? since you're so sure they'll pull a steady 10% every single year for the next 18 years.
what about buying just one share of Apple every month, huh?
smart guy.
super easy to give advice when returns are this high.
let's see if those numbers still look good in a few years.
congrats on discovering fire, now you're lecturing me to buy index funds.
yeah, I'm the dummy and you're the expert.

- I never thought that, let alone said you were stupid.
And I definitely wasn't claiming to be some genius either!

- I haven't been "enlightening" anyone; I was just presenting an "optimal" possibility!
By optimal, I mean finding that sweet spot between a desired return and a tolerable level of risk.

- And no, I don't just do this casually—I've been doing this professionally for 12 years. I'll keep at it until my energy or my brain gives out. I'm building a solid firm and leaving behind a legacy worth protecting!

- Look, I didn't discover fire, nor was I claiming to, so I really don't get why you're being so snarky?
It's not fair to take your frustration out on me just because of opportunity costs (or as Mark Sullivan62 calls them: opportunity cost). 😕

Morgan Jones14 said:We set up a savings account about 15 months ago for our first kid, and now we’re starting another one for the second 😁. Honestly, it feels like the smartest move right now, especially while the government is still chipping in that 15% match...

Honestly, I don't think you quite grasp what "optimal" actually means here.🤣

Jamie Newman5 said:..you get the same returns with a housing savings plan, except you aren't dealing with the market risk inherent in a fund...
Just put money into a housing fund for a kid in New York City. There are no entry fees. After five years, you can extend it, or you can just withdraw the whole thing—or eventually use it to snag a mortgage with decent terms if that's what you decide to do later.

- That's just not true!
I was talking about long-term investing starting at age 18. I used a conservative 10% average annual return, which is actually about 20% lower than what we're seeing in real life right now (around 30% annually for a full 8 years).
* You can't pull off something like that with a housing fund, no matter how much you try...

* It's true that a housing fund doesn't carry the same kind of risk as an open-ended mutual fund, but the trade-off is that someone else is pocketing that extra 20% return.
* And that person provides certain incentives that seem to shrink year after year. Basically, the more they make, the less they feel like giving back, so they offset the difference by cutting those incentives.
* At this rate, it looks like the incentives will disappear entirely, and eventually, the risk will be shifted onto the investors too. Until then, the system is basically: "take whatever you can grab while the opportunity lasts."

- Hey, who's stopping you from pulling your money out of a public fund whenever and however you want???

Maybe think twice before putting confusing info out there in public!👎

Thomas Miller80 said:Cockroach-saver 🙏 🙏

😬

I have zero clue what they mean—but whenever I hear someone on TV call it a "cockroach-saver," I honestly die laughing
Feels more like some ridiculous way for the Federal Reserve to squeeze us dry 🙂

Still better than being a waiter... 🙂

ruggedgull11 said:So, look, I’ve got a little one at home, and I'm seriously weighing whether I should start dropping a set amount every single month until they hit their 18th birthday—so we're talking an 18-year grind here...
I'm wondering if there's some kind of setup where I can toss in at least $200$83 monthly, but still have the flexibility to dump in more whenever I actually have some extra cash left over at the end of the month... Is anyone else here actually putting money aside for their kids? I know it won't turn into a massive fortune by the time they're 18, but at least they'll have a little nest egg of their own, you know? What are you guys suggesting, is there anything like that out there?

* Honestly, doing stuff like this is a must nowadays since the social safety net just isn't what it used to be.
- And hey, there are actually more options available now than ever before.
Here’s a quick breakdown of what you might see from a typical stock mutual fund, assuming an average annual return of 10%:

- Regular monthly deposit $75
- 18-year timeframe (216 months)
- Total amount deposited $16200
- Fees taken from deposits $486
- Amount actually invested $15714
- Estimated principal growth would be roughly $41575
- Which could potentially pay out a permanent monthly annuity based on the BUG principle (living off interest without touching the principal) of about $346

With a setup like this, I'm pretty sure you won't find a better way to handle it for that timeframe—unless, of course, we see much higher returns driven by a market transition that might take another 3–5 years to play out.